Pak40

Are you my long lost cousin?

If a bottle of diesel gas was truely an effective AT weapon then we'd see lots of tanks use incindiary rounds as AT weapons instead of AP rounds. Just a thought. I think the FOLLOW command might play a part in knocking out any AFV. It may help in getting your team in closer to the vehicle and greaty increase the the chance of scoring a hit on a "soft" spot of the vehicle. After all, Molotovs can only really be effective against a tank in placed in the right spot or maybe used in bulk. But the closer you can get should increase your chances of hitting the vehicle. I have yet to use the FOLLOW command but I shall experiment with it soon.

I almost always did the opposite in infantry vs infantry situations. I discovered that manually targeting units usually is a waste of firepower because it "sticks" to the original target even if it is paniced or routed. There would always be a more dangerous and closer target that should be shot at, intead my unit would still be firing at the routed unit that I manually targeted. Letting the TacAI choose it's targets gets better results because it will almost always choose a more dangerous target.

Interesting thought: Combat Mission is basically a computerized version of a tactical table-top wargame with the obvious differences of 3D landscape and the "we go" principle turns. There isn't a table top game, AFAIK, that actually determines if a tanks left or right track is damaged and then only lets the player rotate his tank in one direction. Although Combat Mission currently has elements of a simulator as well as a wargame, the future CM rewrite that will model damage more accurately will make the game more of a simulator - as far as the damage model is concerned anyway. It will certainly make old table top games such as Squad Leader more archaic than they already are.

Random rotation? Honestly that's just plain silly. If your left track is damaged, then you will not be able to turn right at all. There's nothing random about it. You should be only able to turn left at a slow and awkward rate. My point is, if BFC is going to take the time to code the modeling of which track is damaged, then they might as well do it correctly. They shouldn't code a randomness into it, unless it's to model artillery that immobilizes a tank. Since coding this is out of the question for CMBB, we can request it for then CM engine rewrite.

I'm making an Urban based static Operation. It's almost ready for Beta testing. So, if any of you are interested...

I have a PNY Geforce 3 ti200(64 megs). I'm very satisfied with it. All 3D games that I have run very smooth with it, including the newer games that take advantage of the Geforce 3's advanced capabilities. You will definitely want to bump up that ram. I just increased mine from 256 to 512 and have noticed a differece with memory hungry games such as Neverwinter Nights.

Grain fields, whether wheat, oats or barley, should offer decent concealment in the thick of summer. I'm assuming wheat is the dominate grain in Europe/Western Asia as it is in North America. Supposing the "grain" is only 2 feet high, it should offer good concealment to any 2 man team wanting to stay hidden. I could lay down in this type of concealment and you would not be able to spot me from 10 feet away. From the cupola of a tank, maybe 30 meters...tops. If you saw A Thin Red Line, then you know what I'm talking about. Different theater of combat but simular high grass conditions. From your description of the Steppe tiles, it seems they have greater concealment than grain fields; yet I remember playing the demo Citadel scenario where my tank hunter and AT rifle teams were spotted from approximately the same ranges as the wheat (~ 180 meters). Historically this does not hold up. Were not russian infantry able to cammoflage themselves in the plains well enough for German tanks to pass them, then attack from behind? Or am I watching too many Hollywood movies?

extreme. I'm playing the first Operation in the list, I forget the name.

This was in August so it should be almost at its highest. And, no, there were no other units besides the tanks, the nearest one was 180 meters away. Also, the land was completely flat. [ October 02, 2002, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: Pak40 ]

I can't remeber how good wheat fields were in CMBO but I am sure noticing how useless they are for any cover in CMBB. Hiding troops in them for hopes of springing ambushes is useless. For example, I had a Schrek team hide in a wheat field waiting to ambush several tanks. My team never moved during the battle, so it should have recieved a cammo bonus that is described in the manual. The month was August, so the wheat should be at least two feat high if not higher. However, one of the tanks spotted the team at 180 meters(all wheat). How is this possible???

Only 4 years??? Rookie

Stealth has everything to do about "not firing" so that your units are not detected. The leader's stealth bonus represents the leader's ability to control his troops, i.e. keep them from firing, using surrounding elements as cammo, etc... Therefore, when setting an ambush(covered arc), the leader's ability to spring the ambush in the desired place is affected by his stealth bonus. In other words, no stealth bonus = sloppier control of his units and a greater chance that some rookie will pop off a shot prematurely.

[QUOTR] That's how I see it, but it still leaves the MtC command with very limited usefulness. It's ironic. Two years ago when some people on the forum were arguing for a MtC command, the issue of units stopping when they spot distant enemy units was the main counter-argument given by BTS against the move.

I disagree. If a unit that is using MTC and is in cover such as trees, then an enemy in the distance will not likely see your unit; but, your unit will see the enemy unit and stop immediately, thereby ruining your plans to have the unit keep sneaking. On the following turn I wont even be able to use MTC because the enemy unit is already in view. If I were to use MTC, my unit would immediately stop. That kind of defeats the purpose of sneaking.

le bump

Preliminary WALK tests: I ran a couple of quick tests to determine if my infantry opened fire if using the walk command. In both tests I had 2 Crack German platoons against 3 Regular Russian platoons on a small computer generated map. Initial placement was about 300 meters apart. TEST 1 I walked my two German platoons towards the Russians. My squads didn't fire at the initial sight of russians, even when fired upon. However, it should be noted that the TacAI often changed movement orders and sometimes directions when my men came under fire in the open, they were seeking cover either by running or crawling. On the second turn, two of my squads took a shot at a russian unit that had run within 85 meters of my units. TEST 2 Same forces but this time I walked the Germans parallel to the front line instead of towards the Russians. I wanted to see if they would hold their fire at a 300 meter distance from the enemy. I ran two turns while the russians took many shots at my squads. Once again, my squads crawled or ran to cover when out in the open. Only one squad fired at the enemy, but this was because he reached his destination and I hadn't ordered him to hide. So the answer seems to be NO. Squads will not fire at the enemy when issued the WALK command. They will only fire if they see a vulnerable or dangerous unit within 100 meters or so. This isn't identical to the SNEAK command in CMBO but it serves a purpose of getting a bunch of troops from point A to point B in stealth, especially in the beginning stages of the battle. I advise anyone wanting a tighter "hold your fire" radius to use the Cover Arc command set at 15, 30, or 50 meters. Hope this helps. [ September 27, 2002, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: Pak40 ]

The problems with using Cover Arc and Move to achieve a simulated "sneak": 1) It's too tedious to have to set a bunch of cover arcs when it would be simple enough to use the CMBO SNEAK command. Batallion sized engagements have dozens of infantry units and more if you split squads. It is a hell of a chore to have to set cover arcs for all of them. As Boo_Radley said in a previous post, this is a step backwards. 2) A common problem with the cover arc is that people tend to forget that certain units were previously issued cover arcs. When the dymanics of a battle change, you may be wondering why your units arn't firing at the enemy units 100m away in the clear open -- then you'll realize that you set a 15m cover arc 5 or 10 turns ago. That's wasted time that your units could have been delivering deadly kills. Kwazydog previously stated that the MOVE command now pretty much acts as the SNEAK command in CMBO. After all, there must be some sort of differece between MOVE and ADVANCE. We shall test it out and see the results.

Thanks for responding, Dan. So does this mean that the "Move" command in CMBB keeps your units from firing when it sees an enemy unit in the distance? Another problem that someone else mentioned on this thread is that troops seem to get exhausted a lot quicker using the CMBB "sneak" command. Therefore, it can only be used in short distances effectively. I think we're all looking for a command that lets units move at about walking speed and they do not fire unless they come within 50 meters of a threatening enemy unit. If the CMBB "Move" command does this then I think we will all be content.

When I'm on the attack, in the beginning of the battle, I will often use the sneak command with most of my units if I feel a 'walk' or 'run' will give away their position. Although the defender will eventually detect where the bulk of my attack is coming from, it is best to keep him guessing for as long as possible. In the end, he'll have less time to readjust his defenses against my attacking focal point.

Sorry, this wont work because the unit's movement will stop as soon as it sees an enemy unit, no matter how far away the enemy unit is. Often you want want your guys to sneak past known and visible enemy locations and the Move to Contact command will not work in this context. This seems workable but it's an awful lot of micromanagement for wanting units to "not fire while they move". Cover arcs have to be set for each unit since there is no "group cover arc command". This can be quite tedious when trying to order several dozen units to sneak. Also, you may have to readjust the cover arcs once in a while so that your unit will respond to a close threat. I just wish they'd bring back the old "sneak" command. What exactly was wrong with it that made them decide to make it a slower movement rate? I never heard anyone complain that the "sneak" command was too fast in CMBO [ September 26, 2002, 11:34 PM: Message edited by: Pak40 ]

This topic started in another thread but it warrents it's own. A bunch of us are wondering what is the correct command to use for moving units around the board with stealth. The CMBB sneak command is now a blend of the 'crawl' and 'sneak' commands in CMBO but it is too slow and the soldiers are prone. 'Move to Contact' doesn't help much because any enemy unit that is seen will stop your unit. 'Move' seems the same as CMBO where your unit will fire as they move, unless I'm incorrect. So what is the correct way to move effectively without your units firing? Also, does the HQ Stealth bonus only apply to units moving in "sneak" like in CMBO?

I have the same concerns about the "new" sneak command. I think I'll post it as a new topic and maybe we can get an answer from Madmatt or one of the other BFC guys.

just out of curiosity, who's the tester you're referring to?

I agree also. But, they would also have a jeep typically. All battalion, regimental, divisional and corp level artillery spotters would be officers and they would definitly have access to a jeep for their spotting duties, although they wouldn't necessarily be ablt to travel everywhere in a jeep.